question_answer

Facts Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khaleeda no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Gurpreet has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu for more than 150 yr before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Baghmara house.

Problem 2 Rules  When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to have been sold. B.         If a moveable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.           Facts                                            Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in Baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully furnished palatial six bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells it to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to    cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and Khaleeda used this light coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realizes this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

As a judge you would decide in favour of

A)  Khaleeda because while the rest of the building belongs to Khaleeda exclusively, the door is ancestral property and therefore the decision to sell it cannot be Khaleeda's alone

B)  Gurpreet because the door is an integral part of the building as it is attached to it

C)  Khaleeda because the door can be removed from the building and is therefore not attached to it

D)  Gurpreet because the contract is explicitly for the whole house and since the door is part of house, it cannot be removed subsequent to the sale